Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 21:17:36 +0100 From: James Raynard <fhackers@jraynard.demon.co.uk> To: joelh@gnu.org Cc: rotel@indigo.ie, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: PR kern/1144 Message-ID: <19980414211736.36945@jraynard.demon.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <199804140344.WAA08670@detlev.UUCP>; from Joel Ray Holveck on Mon, Apr 13, 1998 at 10:44:53PM -0500 References: <199804131247.NAA01565@indigo.ie> <19980413160603.35279@jraynard.demon.co.uk> <199804140344.WAA08670@detlev.UUCP>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >> These functions are currently defined as macro's, I don't see any > >> nice, fast, MT-safe way that only evaluates the signal number > >> argument once that adds the checking that POSIX requires while > >> keeping them as macros. > > I very much doubt that one exists. > > I forget, what's our position on using gcc's extentions? It's got > some very nice macro features that seem like they could work. In his reply to my original PR, bde posted a macro that did what you suggest for integer arguments (is this not in the PR database?). He also pointed out that macros that expect integer arguments are not very good at handling non-integer arguments :-) James To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19980414211736.36945>